Ibsen Thought August Strindberg example essay topic

When 19th century playwright Henrik Ibsen learned of the way women were being portrayed by his fellow playwright August Strindberg in his play "Miss Julie" in 1888, he became outraged. The play portrayed the main character, Julie, as a secondary form of humanity that is inferior to men -- just as Strindberg viewed women himself. He believed it was a fact of science that women could never be equal to men no matter how hard they try to. Ibsen and Strindberg had been previously competing over social issues, but "Miss Julie" pulled Ibsen's last nerve, says Randolph Carter, professor of drama at the University of South Florida. In retaliation, Ibsen began constructing his own play with his own views about the role of women in society.

He was determined to exploit what he thought were errors in Strindberg's views and ideas, Carter says. "Ibsen was not going to back down", Carter says. "There was already bad blood between the two but Ibsen thought August Strindberg crossed over that line, and he was going to trip him up anyway he could". Ibsen's vision finally became a reality in 1890 when he completed "Hedda Gabler", a play in which the main character Hedda Gabler Tesman believes she can become an equal to men and even dominate them.

When Strindberg found out about the plot, he became furious because he felt Ibsen was promoting feminism. "It became a heated seesaw battle", says Leslie Johnson, director of The Province Theater in Mobile, Ala and drama critic. "One hated the other and angered the other on purpose and then he came back to do the same things he was angry about. It was outrageous; some people even see it as hilarious".

Despite Ibsen and Strindberg's disagreements, both of the works were similar in that they both had the same ending result. The circumstances, however, which led to the conclusion differed greatly. Both of the plays and characters in the play reflect the true views of the playwrights. While the two playwrights do not have much in common besides making a significant impact on the development of modern day naturalism -- the showing of things the way they really are in life -- , the differences in opinion about a woman's place in society would forever separate the two playwrights. Yet, those same works have joined them as well. Throughout the years, many high school and college literature course instructors require students to read or view not one, but both plays alongside each other.

Pearl Kennett, professor of drama and literature at Southwest Missouri State University, said she is able to skip over many works that are linked to each other while teaching her classes, but she cannot do it for "Miss Julie" and "Hedda Gabler."There are some things we can get by with", Kennett said. "I can assure you that those two plays are never missed and they are always together. It's just simply impossible to separate the two works". In Strindberg's "Miss Julie", the play is a battle between a man and woman's proper place in society in which the man ultimately wins. Julie and her lover Jean consistently struggle for power. Julie is a person of high rank socially since her father is a Count, while her lover Jean is a lowly servant.

"Julie had that higher rank stigma on her", Carter says. "Right away, Strindberg is placing her high and in dominance so she can fall flat on her face. Despite her family rights, (Strindberg) will make her fall, and Jean will rise. (Strindberg) is going to make sure man would become dominant even in the unlikeliest of situations".

Sure enough, Julie's power over Jean dwindles as the play progresses. Both Julie and Jean have dreams of reversing into each other's role as Julie dreams of lowering herself on the social ladder and Jean dreams of rising up to obtain a high social status. Before long, Jean gains complete dominance over Julie. Julie evens lowers herself so much that she says she will obey Jean "like a dog" would. Even when Julie realizes that she has shamed her family by declining socially and wants to kill herself because of it, she cannot do it on her own.

She must ask Jean to command her to commit suicide, which she does. She was so strong and then became so weak", Johnson says. "It's fascinating how Strindberg brought her from one extreme to the other. She takes her life loses all of her rightful power because of her gender. I can visualize Ibsen's ears steaming with fury at this.

It must have driven him nuts". In reprisal, Ibsen created the character Hedda, one who holds on to her beliefs that she can be equal to a man throughout the play. In the first scene, Hedda is very rude to her husband Tesman and his aunt, who have done nothing wrong. "Right off the bat, Ibsen makes it known that Hedda would be in charge", Kennett says. "She's obviously the ruler of the house at that initial point, and she is going to fight to stay that way all the way through". Hedda consistently fights against the constraints that her society has placed on women.

Hedda believes she should not be subject to men and continues to fight what her environment says. However, when Hedda finally realizes that society will not accept her as she wants, despite her determination, she becomes destructive. She hurts the others around her. Ibsen creates Hedda as the daughter of a general who raised her as though she were a boy. Throughout the play, it is apparent that Ibsen portrays Hedda as not a typical housewife or mother, Johnson says. This becomes evident when Hedda ignores and denies her pregnancy.

The simple thought that she would have to be a typical mother and lose independence disturbs her. "She wants control and she wants things to be her way", Johnson says. "Most scholars believe she only married Tesman because he would give her wealth with his possible professorship at a local university. Because Tesman was fairly laid-back, she had easy control over him". One man was not enough for Ibsen. He adds another character for Hedda to control -- the great scholar L"ovberg.

As L"ovberg's former lover, Hedda has had control over him since then and has been able to share things with her that he could never tell anyone else. Seeing that the woman currently in love with L"ovberg, Mrs. Elvsted, has created a manuscript with the great scholar, which Hedda calls their "child", Hedda becomes jealous because she feels she is losing control over L"ovberg. "Her jealousy is wicked and cold", Carter said. "She burns L"ovberg's manuscript instead of giving it back to him when she has that power. But she maintains power over L"ovberg when he became depressed and was convinced by Hedda to kill himself. When she gives him the pistol, she shows how great her control is over the man".

Her power came to an end, though. Judge Brack, the only person who knew that Hedda assisted in L"ovberg's suicide, now has the power to blackmail her, which he threatens to do. The realization that someone else has power over her is unbearable for Hedda. She then commits suicide -- the same result as Julie. In the process, she also takes the life of her baby. "It's interesting how he chose to end the play with the same results as his rival", Kennett says.

"But I think Ibsen's main goal was to show that Hedda still had that control to the end when she took her own life without anyone telling her what to do. It was a choice she made, unlike Mrs. Julie who acted like a puppy she needed Jean to give her directions to do the same thing". Although there is no evidence, Kennett believes that Ibsen possibly created L"ovberg as a scholar to mock Strindberg and his views. She even thinks L"ovberg may be a true representation of how Ibsen would have liked to have seen Strindberg treated in real life.

"I could never imagine what August Strindberg would have thought or said if he had that same assumption I have", Kennett says. "Strindberg under the control of a woman? In our wildest dreams!".